The NRL have rejected calls from former referees boss Bill Harrigan to appoint his successor only from within the ranks of on-field officials.
Harrigan and his referees co-coach Stuart Raper were sacked from their roles Friday with a new NRL referees elite performance manager to be appointed to replace them in the coming weeks.
Former grand final whistleblower Harrigan sees only former referees as suitable for such a role, which would rule out possible candidates in ex-NRL team coaches Tim Sheens and Brian Smith.
But director of football operations Nathan McGuirk said the NRL would cast as wide a net as possible to find the most suitable person, as the game seeks to recover from a year punctuated by officiating blunders.
“Our priority at this stage is to find the best possible candidate for the position and that could come from anywhere,” McGuirk told AAP on Saturday.
“We are not going to limit ourselves as to where that candidate may come from. We want the search to be as extensive as possible.”
Earlier Harrigan told Triple M’s Dead Set Legends: “You need to have a referee in charge there because he understands the game from a referee’s point of view, he has the empathy of the game from a referee’s point of view, and he understands it and that is what needs to happen.
“No matter who they put in, and it’s up to them, it’s their call, make sure it is a referee.”
Harrigan, who admitted his dumping did not come as a surprise after State of Origin and the NRL finals were marred by a number of highly contentious decisions, also called for an urgent review of rugby league’s rulebook claiming it had not kept pace with the modern game.
McGuirk said a thorough review of refereeing would be conducted once the new appointment was made, including a re-think on the applying the `benefit of the doubt’ rule to awarding tries.
“The first thing we have to do is to get the new leadership structure in place and then we will move from there,” he said.
“We have had a rules committee in place for the last few years now and that is something they will have the opportunity to look at when the time comes.”
oikee
Guest
A knock-on is not a knock-on according to the rules we have. The ball can come off your torso, go a million miles forward off your Torso and be called play-on because the rules are out-dated. This is why the video refs are getting themselves into all sorts of knots, and a complete mess. By sending a off the torso knock-on up to the video ref to see if he touched the ball with his arm or hands is why we have a complete dogs breakfast. This is why we see replay after replay to see if the player touched the ball. The point is he has knocked it forward, we dont need to be looking at this, (as Gus would say), but we do, the ref sends it upstairs for the clown in the box to sip coffee and watch replay after replay of some clown who has knocked the ball forward, and then get the knock forward over-ruled to play on,, TRY. ?????? So the knock-on rule is not straight forward as you say. Because of the out-dated Torso rule it can be allowed to play on, even if the ball has gone forward 20 metres, it can be ruled play on. This is madness, you get rid of the Torso rule and any ball off his Torso is a knock-on, then it is right. At the moment it is a complete dogs breakfast because the torso rule allows it to be a dogs breakfast. All the Torso rule is about is grounding the ball for a try. To be honest we dont need this, either score the try with your arms or hands or it is no try, it is that simple. To fix this whole dogs breakfast is easy. get rid of a out-dated 100 year old Torso rule, like the corner post, it is that simple, get rid of it.
Anakin
Guest
The rules are fine. Simply enforce them. The issues have arisen because referees (perhaps under Harrigans gidance) are trying to read too much into them. A knock on is still a knock on, a head high tackle is still a head high tackle (seriously, do we need a dozen different gradings??), a strip is still a strip and an obstruction is still an obstruction. The only one I'd scrap is Benefit of the Doubt - if there's doubt a try was scored, don't award it. Oh, and get someone in the video box who (i) isnt blind, and (ii) isn't afraid to make a decision based on their initial impression from the replay - not watch twenty bloody replays and still get it wrong because everytime they watch it again doubt (there's that word) creeps in. One final point - coaches are there to guide their teams to a winning formula within the rules, not to try and re-write the rules; having a coaches forum to look at rule changes is the inmates running the asylum. Its ridiculous!!
Tommy
Guest
The league should make the rules & the referees should enforce them. The referees have got in a mess because they have tried to come up with their own interpretations (make the rules) and then enforce them without input from the rest of the code & even what the fans think. There is a good case for re writing the rules for better clarity but it shouldn't be left in the hands of the referees & current NRL coaches either.
oikee
Guest
Why would you appoint someone from the dinosaurs that have been getting it wrong for so long now. Hamstead needs to go, and a big broom is all you need to appoint. For the clean sweep. I see Harrigon has come out today and call for a rule clean-up. ? Everyone has heard me calling for this for 3 years now. Harrigin should have sorted this out 3 years ago, or at least looked at the problems. This is why rugby league has not grown, has not had any direction or common sense, . It is all here now, for everyone to see the incompitence of the dinosaurs we had running the game. John Grant is well on track to clean up this whole mess these dinosaurs have created, without being questuioned, without having anyone to answer to, and Carr is next.
eagleJack
Guest
Hmmmm I don't remember Stuart Raper refereeing many games over the years but I do remember him as a coach. And wouldn't the rulebook not keeping up with the modern game rest squarely at your feet Bill?
steve b
Roar Guru
I would like to see a former player in the box as well as a ref !!
db swannie
Guest
yes bill great idea.. Pick someone who once might have had some great ideas ,but they probably dissappeared under your (I did it my way) rules.